I haven't so much intended to define the division between proper and improper enabling here, but rather just to suggest that such a division exists, and we might not be seeing the division properly as a society.

A New Cycle

I have previously contemplated different possible paths for solutions in regard to helping addicts, especially our loved ones, from escaping their illness. Often, especially with severe addiction and women, addicts fall in to the hand of violent people, criminals, and even become criminals themselves (whether through force or choice). It seems to me then we can quickly identify that one way we can make the problem of addiction at least slightly less complex is to take control of the drugs our loved ones are fiending for and especially take the control from criminals that exploit our loved ones.

The proposal for this is of course the evolution of silk road and the dark markets. I have some thoughts on this here and here.

If we can imagine the ability to buy any drug easily and for a reasonable cost at an accessible store, we should be able to see that our fallen loved ones could have more freedom and be more in control of their own lives. That they could at least be safely enticed to come home or to be found, would allow family and other support workers to extend the help they wish to offer. This along with other possible supplemental drugs/medicines such as Kratom, could make a dramatic impact on what we otherwise call the “War on Drugs”.

This change alone could help us create a new cycle, breaking the patterns that make recovering from severe addiction near impossible for many people.

How to Get an Addict to Stop Lying to You

In my writing “On Addiction and Lies” I make the hypothesis that if you give an addict money and access to their drugs they will basically always take the offer. They become dependable. I think it is this point and one I make on how addicts have different perspectives on life (specifically how they view and use time) that shows us how we can better get into the mind of an addict and view them from a more predictable perspective.

In this we can see how we often “force” an addict to lie, as they are not otherwise able to so readily change their corrupted core beliefs.

In other words, an addicts' decision to “tell the truth or not”, from the perspective of a non-addict or a family member or friend, is really related to a different set of moral rules. Once we understand this, much of an addicts behavior can be quite predictable, quite controllable (nefarious people control addicts all the time), and quite (re-)directable.

Enabling as a Cure

What I basically am postulating is that we can provide our loved ones with their drugs of choice, with SOME provisions or “ultimatums” that are directed towards their recovery and sobriety. I think those that think this is a terrible idea might have previously felt it would be easy when they tried to help an addict. Rather it's a very delicate process and we NEED to understand an addict has limitations.

We cannot expect logic to prevail here. I'll give you 1 cookie now or two cookies later-I think the addict will usually choose the 1 cookie now. I think that is part of their problem. Addicts don't use time properly in this sense.

Don't try to "teach" them or reason with them otherwise.

However, there does seem to be a threshold to this regard, a mental barrier in which the addict will either cooperate and take the deal, or head to where they feel they can get a better deal or chance to fulfill their craving.

As long as we offer deals on the co-operative side of the threshold, I think there can be great success with encouraging our loved ones into a better direction. A better direction is not only better, but often will lead to an accelerated recovery provided the direction is sustained. Here I am speaking to the human want for normalcy, social acceptance, success, true relationships etc. Its just a matter of time before an addict heading in the CORRECT direction gets a proper taste/dose of these things and they begin to take control of their own recovery. This taking control is already basically cited in today's society as the addicts "choice" to recover, and symbolizes the beginning of recovery.

If we offer deals that do not meet the addicts' threshold, then it seems clear we set OURSELVES up for disappointment, and we set our fallen ones up for failure.

This is a KEY point often missed.

When Enabling Goes Too Far

There IS (of course) still a threshold in regard to what is help and support and what is just causing our loved one to abuse and take advantage of the help they are getting. Perhaps an addict needs $40/day in order to stay focused enough to get a couple errands done and stay out of trouble. Maybe they get food and a place to stay otherwise, if they can follow a few rules like not having people over and not stealing etc.

This might be a decent set-up IF it can remain stable. I have read of MANY addicts that maintain a job with such a lifestyle. Recovery from this position is FAR easier than someone living on the street stealing an begging from score to score.

But then what if this person goes out and steals, begs, or barter's etc. ANYWAYS. Perhaps they find their OWN $40/day and now they have escalated to $80 worth of their drug a day (this could obviously escalate even further).

The goal here is not to provide a steady supply of drugs, but rather to keep the addict coming around family and friends in a setting that is safe for both the addict and the people that wish to support them.

Addiction, Support, and, Minimal Effort

Here we can re-visit Addiction and the Distorted Perception and Use of Time and remember that an addict will put of everything to last minute to their want to get high. The relevant point to remember comes in an example. If we offer our addict friend a ride to get a prescription, they will probably be ready at the very last minute. If we DIDN'T offer them a ride, and perhaps they needed to take the bus, they probably would get ready earlier (assuming the bus left earlier than the ride we offered would). In this sense offering the support of a ride kind of encourages the addict to get their day together later (perhaps this would be useful if they needed time to tend to something else).

I think this is the extra consideration in regard to helping someone without exactly enabling them.

Basically we are weighing the deal we are offering with how it will help the addict. The deal needs to be sweet enough, but it also needs to tend them towards recovery. If they might just take a bus to their medication than a ride, then its not really helping, and could be slowing the addicts life down.

Randomness and Helping Without Enabling

There might be a better formula here but I think I can make a philosophical point. We want our fallen loved ones to seek us for help. We want them to have food and access to shelter. We want them to be apart of normal relationships and conversations. We want them to make their doctor appointments, group help meetings, and counseling meetings. I think for all this we need to BE there for them, and in order to be there for them we need to enter the world they are otherwise hiding from us.

For this I think the offer of SOME money for SOME access to drugs SOMETIME might be optimal. We don't even need to explain this to our loved one. Addicts I suspect are naturally bad at understanding probability and randomness versus patterns. To know that SOMETIMES they will get what they need will always keep them in touch with their family or loved ones or those that wish to support them.

From the supporters' side what this means is you will not be able to lead your loved one to safety perfectly like a horse and a carrot. But you can nudge them in the right direction, not just with money, or their own drugs, but also by keeping the communication barrier open, and being able to ask THEM how they are feeling about their lifestyle and what THEY might want to do about it.

The Hard Stance is Blood-letting Exorcism

I think that the “old school” belief that our loved ones must CHOOSE to get help and get better, is akin to blood-letting and Exorcism. I think when we cut our ties and communication from our loved ones all we are really doing is starving them from food, shelter, normalcy, love, good communication, and the conversation they need to keep their brains in a state conducive to recovery.

Some people DO seem to get better when left to fall on their own, but I have other reasons why I think this might be, and so I suspect its not at all optimal. To me, getting your life together when you are down, is a very difficult thing for ANYONE to do. To be in the state of an addict and to have to try to get things together seems next to impossible to me. I for one think I could not do it without much help, I don't expect many others to be able to.

I haven't so much intended to define the division between proper and improper enabling here, but rather just to suggest that such a division exists, and we might not be seeing the division properly as a society.